Abstract

Abstract It is often said that the courts will not save parties from bad bargains: as Lord Nottingham observed, even ‘the Chancery mends no man's bargain’. This article considers what is meant by ‘bad bargain’, and argues that courts should be reluctant to develop the law in a way which would allow sophisticated commercial actors to escape bad bargains. This analysis is timely since in the current economic climate a number of long-term contracts have become especially disadvantageous to one party, and one consequence of Brexit is likely to be an increase in instances where one party tries to escape a bad bargain. Sympathy for the party which finds itself subject to a bad bargain has led to pressure on courts to find that an agreement is not binding; to expand the scope of the vitiating factors; and to liberalise the principles of interpretation and rectification, for example. It is suggested that courts should not readily bow to such pressure.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.